An argument 'against' biblical inspiration

That’s your Biblicist problem, not mine. As the inappropriate Pauline proof text shows. God is bigger than that. Than our narrow, bitter, twisted, fearful, ignorant takes.

I would be more than happy to know that Paul encountered the risen Christ on the road to Damascus. It has the sublime audacious power of authenticity. I want it to be true. I want almighty God dying helplessly in empty, screaming humanity to be true. Christ crucified. Risen. For that means we are saved. From the meaningless suffering of this scintilla of existence.

Because of your misapplication of Paul to my and everyone else’s situation I started out dismissive of him here, but realised that I have no problem with where he was coming from at the time. I should be more sympathetic to where you are. Not agreeing with it at all, just empathetic. Putting myself in your place. Which I can try.

God, Love, in Christ is so much bigger, efficacious than even He imagined.

1 Like

The entire Torah speaks repeatedly of a coming seed and messiah. It starts in the very first chapters. The apostles argued Jesus through the Torah.

What, you’ve demonstrated that I deny, refuse to admit the truth of a concept or proposition that is supported by the majority of scientific or historical evidence? Where?

Where? Not in the Written Torah. You mean in its extension in the TaNaKh. Where is it in the first chapters of Genesis? Apart from the Christian interpolation of the Protevangelium. And what does that have to do with Jesus? Please join up the dots. Then every reasonable non-Messianic Jew will convert.

This topic was automatically closed 6 days after the last reply. New replies are no longer allowed.